trustgraph runs, with mocks standing in for external services. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 18 minutes, hitting 3 errors on the way, and recorded the session.

How did Argusic test trustgraph?

On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 61524b78b297. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.

What did it cost to test trustgraph?

The run that produced this verdict cost $0.09: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.

How long does trustgraph take to install?

18 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.

Does trustgraph need a GPU?

Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.

What goes wrong when installing trustgraph?

3 things broke in the recorded run, and 3 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.

Where is the evidence for trustgraph?

The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.

trustgraph

The Semantic Intelligence Layer for Ontologies

Runs with mockssource: GitHub homepagePythonApache-2.0commit 61524b78b297

Python, Apache-2.0 licensed. The project labels itself: agent, agent runtime, context graph, determinism, document processing, explainable ai, graph and graphrag.

trustgraph runs, with stand-ins for the services it depends on. An Argusic agent installed it in 18 minutes and hit 3 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.

All 8 TrustGraph sub-packages built and installed in venv; 3335 unit+contract tests pass; CLI commands functional.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured

Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 92 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).

At a glance

verdict: Runs with mocks
Argusic Score: 92 / 100
cost of the verifying run: $0.09 (measured)
recorded runs: 1
last tested: 2026-10-02
stars: 2,769
forks: 329
open issues: 19
watchers: 29
size: 102 MB
created: 2024-07-10
last push: 2026-10-02

Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed 2026-10-02. Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.

What was measured

From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.

Time lost to each failure while testing trustgraph, drawn from the recorded run — Every bar is a failure the agent recorded, with the time it cost. Drawn from this run, not from anywhere else.

What went wrong, in the agent's own words

The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.

Editable install finders fragment trustgraph namespace between packages3 minutes
System Python is externally managed (PEP 668)1 minute
8 tests failed due to missing sentence-transformers1 minute

Install time: 18 minutes
Cold machine to finish: 19 minutes
Errors hit and fixed: 3 hit, 3 fixed with no human help
How the result was proved: pytest tests/unit tests/contract exited 0, 3335 passed, 53 skipped
Model tokens used: 138,881
Exact commit tested: 61524b78b297
Container image: sha256:cdd920bce783

What was not measured

The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.

Peak GPU memory: this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
Behaviour over a long run: each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
Behaviour against real services: this run was verified against stand-in services only

The end of the recording

The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.

**Errors fixed:**
1. **System Python externally managed** — Created a venv (`python3 -m venv .venv`) and installed fr…
2. **Editable install namespace conflict** — The editable finders fragmented the `trustgraph.model`…
3. **Missing `sentence-transformers`** — 8 huggingface model tests failed; installed with `pip inst…
tokens used
138,881
All **3335 tests pass** (3210 unit + 125 contract), with 53 skipped (infra-dependent integration te…
Here's the summary:
**Errors fixed:**
1. **System Python externally managed** — Created a venv (`python3 -m venv .venv`) and installed fr…
2. **Editable install namespace conflict** — The editable finders fragmented the `trustgraph.model`…
3. **Missing `sentence-transformers`** — 8 huggingface model tests failed; installed with `pip inst…

Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.

How it was tested

One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.

Strengths and limits

Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.

What went well

Recovered from all 3 errors without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
Licensed Apache-2.0, as reported by its host.

What did not, or is not known

Only reached a running state against stand-in services, so nothing here proves it works against the real ones.
Took 18 minutes to install, slower than the median of the 65 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.

Of the 66 agent projects Argusic has installed and timed, trustgraph was the 51st fastest to reach a running state, and 44 of 66 reached one at all.

Also tested, in the same area

Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.

Run history

tested by	attempt	outcome	score	cost USD	when
Argusic Runner	1/3	Runs with mocks	92.00	0.09	2026-10-02 19:34 UTC

Embed the badge

Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.

[![Tested by Argusic](https://argusic.com/badge/trustgraph.svg)](https://argusic.com/subject/trustgraph)

Questions

Does trustgraph run?: trustgraph runs, with mocks standing in for external services. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 18 minutes, hitting 3 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
How did Argusic test trustgraph?: On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 61524b78b297. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
What did it cost to test trustgraph?: The run that produced this verdict cost $0.09: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
How long does trustgraph take to install?: 18 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
Does trustgraph need a GPU?: Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
What goes wrong when installing trustgraph?: 3 things broke in the recorded run, and 3 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
How does trustgraph compare with the alternatives?: Of the 66 agent projects Argusic has installed and timed, trustgraph was the 51st fastest to reach a running state, and 44 of 66 reached one at all.
Where is the evidence for trustgraph?: The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.